Liberal Intellectuals and Public Culture in Modern Britain, 1815-1914: Making Words Flesh, by William C. Lubenow
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this book, layered with anecdotes and biographical vignettes, William Lubenow traces the reorientation of public culture in nineteenth-century Britain: from a confessional state in which public office was tied to adherence to the Thirty-nine Articles to a new culture in which liberal values dominated. These liberal values formed ‘a moral mindset’ (p. 2), ‘a multivalent sensibility’ (p. 7) that was characterised by scepticism and tolerance, and that stretched beyond a particular party. The first chapter examines changes in religious sensibility from the repeal of the Tests and Corporation Acts (1828) and the enactment of Catholic Emancipation (1829) up to the early twentieth century. The author argues that the personal struggles between faith and scepticism of these generations shaped liberal values. As religion became more fluid, and more personal, imaginative explorations of religious belief led intellectuals towards a new liberal sensibility. Lubenow’s argument that religious sensibilities were critical to the articulation of liberal values reinforces recent scholarship which has postponed the advent of secularisation until well into the twentieth century. This first chapter captures effectively the impact of religious culture on the ways in which sceptical liberals imagined their moral space in the world; Lubenow quotes Virginia Woolf recalling Keynes’s regret that new generations would not experience the religious world which he had rejected. One of the virtues of the book is its wide reading of personal papers; Lubenow’s sensitivity to the fluidity and personal quality of these generations’ preoccupation with religious belief and unbelief owes much to these sources.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".